In the present paper, I would like to examine the political issue of the right to produce nuclear bomb by Iran. There has been much talk in the international political circles lately about the issue whether Iran should be allowed to produce atomic energy to produce nuclear bomb or not. There are the ones who seem to oppose it on the spot. This opposite block to the issue has its own arguments and reasons for this decision. On the other hand, those who seem to support the Iranian nuclear program (most certainly the Iranian government itself) bear their own reasons and arguments.
In this way, a continuous debate is what echoes today’s building of political discussion. The following paper is an attempt to critically analyze all that is going on in the very connection. In a technical manner, the present paper focuses to examine arguments on both sides of the blocks and attempts to reach a conclusion that is most appropriate with regard to the critical examination through this paper. (This can be from your general knowledge about the issue)
Iranian Point of View on Acquiring Bomb After another UN deadline being over in the late February, the Iranian President still came up with a stern declaration that Iranian nuclear program will not be either stopped or rolled back. This stern stance by the Iranian President must ask us to investigate what it is for which the Iranian authorities are taking so hard a decision. First of all, as Berman, (p. 14-17, 2007) notes, it is the natural need of time with which Iran has been trying to cope up.
According to author, by this way, Iran can save its cause of existence against the aggression of other countries with which the country has been at war every since the establishment of the republic by the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in 1979. In this way, if we critically analyze the situation, we will have to admit that Iran has a right to develop the nuclear program as self defense is the birth right of every human being.
The other reason for which Iran wants to develop nuclear program, in the words of Berman, (p.14-17, 2007), is that Iran’s ruling clergy is going gray. There internal political and other issues which compel the Iranian authorities to go for the bomb which can vitalize the power of the state which, in turn, can sooth the political unrest thus taking place in different parts of Iran. Looking at the situation from this angle, there is no doubt that Iran is in a very strong position to want to acquire the bomb that would once again lead the country to heights of power and stability which has long been lost by the state (Berman, p. 14-17, 2007).
One more thing that comes out from this examination is that like the United States of America which, hypocritically boasts of making peace in the world but making its own ends meet (ie the invasion of Iraq for oil); it’s the prime right for Iran to acquire nuclear program. As such Iran is right to claim hold on nuclear program. (From Heading, this entire part has been taken, paraphrased from “Why Tehran Wants THE BOMB. “) On the other hand, according to Dickey (p. 36-40, 2005), we see that Iran speaks out about its right to continue nuclear program under the nuclear treaty obligations.
The country also gives reasons which are in nature peaceful, for continuing nuclear program. One prominent reason (worth mentioning here) is that according to Iran, it needs to establish and manage its own cycle of nuclear-fuel so that its possible dependence on other countries can be put away because these countries are likely to receive pressure from the United States of America which will result in the death of Iranian nuclear plants which are purely for civilian purposes. According to Dickey (p.
34-40, 2005), Iran has learnt this lesson from tow major factors one is Iran’s going at war with Iraq in the 80s, and very restrictive sanctions brought by the US administration. Hence, the entire society demands that Iran develop its own independent nuclear program. (This one paragraph taken from “Iran’s Nuclear Lies. “) Opposing Viewpoint Against Iranian slogan bearing to continue developing it nuclear program, there are those who talk about different approaches so that Iranian continuation of nuclear program can be put to a physical as well as paper death.
One much-talked-of solution for this goal is to bring military force to invade Iran to keep it at bay from the nuclear advances or bring sanctions against Iran. What comes out to be the analysis is that Iran looks at the atomic power more as a matter of national and Islam grace? The Iranian sees pride in acquiring power rather than making their defense stronger. However, in the words of Clawson, p. 13-20, 2007, sanctions may work looking at the present economic situation of the Iranian economy.
What is needed to be made available to the country so that its nuclear program remains within the Iranian influence, is to bring some ‘economic instruments’ at play because the country is economically vulnerable at this very time. According to the World Bank’s 2003 demographic to date Iranian GDP remains thirty percent below what is once was in the mid of the 19702, despite recent growth in GDP. United States of America can bring hard times for pro-Iranian organizations such as Alavi Foundation to play this trick.
Moreover, it can prepare its allies and European counterparts to come to terms with this plan. As such diplomacy is more like a prioritized option given the present state of the country. However, I do not agree with Clawson, p. 13-20, 2007 that after diplomacy fails, the US should make use of its military power. What my point here is that the US diplomacy should be effective enough to bring results. (This entire part taken from “Could Sanctions Work against Tehran. ”)